EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015TN0072
Case T-72/15: Action brought on 6 February 2015 — Hippler v Commission
Case T-72/15: Action brought on 6 February 2015 — Hippler v Commission
Case T-72/15: Action brought on 6 February 2015 — Hippler v Commission
OJ C 138, 27.4.2015, p. 57–58
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
27.4.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 138/57 |
Action brought on 6 February 2015 — Hippler v Commission
(Case T-72/15)
(2015/C 138/74)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Eberhard Hippler (Dorsten, Germany) (represented by M. Richter Rechtsanwältin)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
prohibit the defendant, on pain of a fine to be fixed by the General Court for each infringement, from making the transport maps of ‘Bochum’, ‘Dortmund’, ‘Düsseldorf/Meerbusch’, ‘Duisburg’ and ‘Essen’ available to the public without the permission of the applicant, as has been done in the case of: http://dma.jrc.it/idas/lightrail/Dortmund.pdf http://dma.jrc.it/idas/lightrail/Bochum.pdf http://dma.jrc.it/idas/lightrail/Essen.pdf http://dma.jrc.it/idas/lightrail/Duesseldorf.pdf http://dma.jrc.it/idas/lightrail/Duisburg.pdf |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay damages to the applicant in the amount of EUR 10 100; |
|
— |
order the defendant to reimburse the applicant the pre-trial legal costs in the amount of EUR 2 743,43; |
|
— |
to pay the costs of the proceedings, including legal fees. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant alleges an infringement of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC (1) and also an infringement of Paragraphs 15 and 19a in conjunction with Paragraph 97(2) of the German Law on copyright (Urheberrechtsgesetz) (2).
The applicant claims that the disputed transport maps are protected by copyright as academic or technical works. The applicant has not at any time consented to any form of use by the defendant and in particular has not granted any rights of use. Nor has the defendant been lawfully granted any rights of use from a third party. By using the maps the defendant has made them available to the public or has communicated the maps to the public.
In addition, the applicant claims that, in order to ascertain the resulting economic loss, a calculation must be made on analogy with that applied to licences. The applicant has a right to payment for an appropriate licence. Both on the German market and as recognised by the German courts, licences are ordinarily and appropriately granted in the amount of EUR 2 200 per map. As a result, the damages amount to EUR 10 100.
In addition, the applicant claims that the defendant has caused it non-economic consequential loss in breach of its exclusive copyright and should therefore be ordered to compensate that loss and prohibited from continuing the acts of use at issue.
Finally, the applicant claims that the applicant’s lawyer was justified in sending the defendant a letter before action on the applicants behalf and the defendant must accordingly reimburse the applicant those resulting, necessary lawyer’s fees in the amount of EUR 2 743,43.
(1) Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167 of 22/06/2001).
(2) Law on copyright (Urheberrechtsgesetz) of 9 September 1965 (BGBl. I, p. 1273), as last amended by Article 1 of the Law of 5 December 2014 (BGBl. I p. 1974).